I have a friend who is an old Zen hand. Okay, lots of my friends are old Zen hands. This one has been engaged in the project for several decades, sat with most of the prominent teachers of our time, and has in fact completed the formal Harada Yasutani curriculum with one of them.

He and I are visiting the cases from the beginning one more time. It’s a leisurely affair, where we touch on the traditional points but we also use the cases as spring boards to discuss those often important aspects of how the rubber hits the road, how these insights into what the world and our own hearts really are like, manifest here and now, but which are usually not addressed in any detail as one proceeds through the many, many cases.

[...]

But at some point the conversation turned to one thing we both have encountered that was, is a bit disturbing. A lot of Zen practitioners, and even some teachers seem to think, at least rhetorically, that the “be here now” thing of Zen, the “this moment,” the “this very moment” of our way has something to do with cutting off all thought of past or future. Just this as in just this and nothing else.

That raised to mind a case from the Wumenguan, the great twelfth century anthology of koan, the Gateless Gate. Number twenty-five, “Yangshan’s Sermon from the Third Seat.” It’s brief, and goes like this.

Once in a dream the master Yangshan visited Maitreya in the Tusita heaven. He was led to the third seat in the great hall. As he sat a monk struck the sounding board and announced “the monk in the third seat will deliver today’s sermon.” Yangshan stood, struck the sounding board, himself, and said, “The truth of the great way is beyond the four propositions and transcends the one hundred negations. Listen. Listen.”

Yangshan Huiji was a Ninth century Chan master standing in the fifth generation from Daijian Huineng, a successor to the great Guishan Lingyou. He had studied with several teachers before finding Guishan, and had several awakenings. But it was with Guishan that it all came together.

Guishan was an heir of Baizhang Huaihai, and was known for his more gentle way, using symbols and metaphor more than the stick. So, for instance, when he saw the young Yangshan was ripe, he met him with a gentle pointing. Yangshan asked what is the Buddha’s true dwelling place? Guishan replied, “Consider the great mystery. Turn your attention to that boundless light. At the moment your thoughts about all this are exhausted, you’ve come to the source. Here you will find true nature is form and emptiness. Here the true Buddha manifests.”

No stick. No yell. Rather, words do the pointing. And for Yangshan at that moment, the right moment, the time of fulfillment. Or, perhaps the time of emptying. A time of stepping beyond clinging to form, or to emptiness, was at hand.

And with that he found himself standing in the Buddha realm.

So, in this story, a teacher steeped in a more gentle pointing, a use of image and metaphor to help the student on the way, he describes the heaven of the Buddha to come. In some sense, you. Me. The whole world suffering and yearning. Pointed to something very important.

Which brings us back to that thought that “this very moment” involves cutting off all thought, that this project somehow has nothing to do with past or future, the idea that “this” is an atom untouched by all that has gone on before or what will happen out of this moment.

Pure. Untouched.

In fact an awakening that has nothing to do with the past or the future is selling a bill of goods. This “awakening” is more like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe. This has nothing to do with Zen.

Wow. Synchronicity, Carol. I just shared the same image with some friends on FB, but with a completely different quote and a completely different perception of "the dream"… I'm surprised that Ford is so sure that his view on this is right and that "This “awakening” is more like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe. This has nothing to do with Zen."

universeandman.jpg

"You've made up the whole thing. But the awakeness in you is not dreaming. Only the mind is dreaming. It tells itself stories and wants to know if you're progressing. When you shift into wakefulness, you realize, "Wait, it's a dream. The mind is creating an altered state of reality, a virtual reality, but it's not true -- it's just thought." Thought can tell a million stories inside of awareness, and it's not going to change awareness one bit. The only thing that's going to change is the way the body feels. If you tell yourself a sad story, the body reacts to that. And if you tell yourself a self-aggrandizing story, the body feels puffed up, confident. But when you realize it's all stories, there can be a vast waking up out of the mind, out of the dream. You don't awaken, what has eternally been awake realizes itself. That which is eternally awake is what you are."

~Adyashanti

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

"Meditation is not meant to help us run away from difficulties. It is meant to allow positive healing to take place. To meditate is to learn how to stop being carried away by our regrets about the past, our anger or despair in the present, or our worries about the future. The best way to take care of the future is to take care of the present moment."

I'm confused by what Ford is saying. This is what mindfulness practice and meditation are all about, to be fully present. To learn to detach from our false illusions, expectations, ideas of self/other. Its not " like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe."

One always has access to our ideas about the past, but without being mindful of breathing as breathing, awareness as awareness in the present, we take those ideas to be real, rather than see them as the delusions and stories they actually are.

christopher::: wrote:"You've made up the whole thing. But the awakeness in you is not dreaming. Only the mind is dreaming. It tells itself stories and wants to know if you're progressing. When you shift into wakefulness, you realize, "Wait, it's a dream. The mind is creating an altered state of reality, a virtual reality, but it's not true -- it's just thought." Thought can tell a million stories inside of awareness, and it's not going to change awareness one bit. The only thing that's going to change is the way the body feels. If you tell yourself a sad story, the body reacts to that. And if you tell yourself a self-aggrandizing story, the body feels puffed up, confident. But when you realize it's all stories, there can be a vast waking up out of the mind, out of the dream. You don't awaken, what has eternally been awake realizes itself. That which is eternally awake is what you are."

christopher::: wrote:I'm confused by what Ford is saying. This is what mindfulness practice and meditation are all about, to be fully present. To learn to detach from our false illusions, expectations, ideas of self/other. Its not " like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe."

One always has access to our ideas about the past, but without being mindful of breathing as breathing, awareness as awareness in the present, we take those ideas to be real, rather than see them as the delusions and stories they actually are.

i think ford is just warning ppl not to literally cut themselves from past and future and come to some misconception that awakening is just lit. staying in the present. if one does do that, then their "so-called" awakening would be like a disease.

does that make sense?

be well,guo gu

Founder and teacher of Tallahassee Chan Center of the Dharma Drum Lineage of Chan Buddhismhttp://www.tallahasseechan.org/Received inka from Master Sheng Yen (1930-2009) in 1995

Guo Gu wrote:i think ford is just warning ppl not to literally cut themselves from past and future and come to some misconception that awakening is just lit. staying in the present. if one does do that, then their "so-called" awakening would be like a disease.

does that make sense?

Yes. Like a good Rx from the doctor, or a good drink from the bartender.

christopher::: wrote:Wow. Synchronicity, Carol. I just shared the same image with some friends on FB, but with a completely different quote and a completely different perception of "the dream"… I'm surprised that Ford is so sure that his view on this is right and that "This “awakening” is more like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe. This has nothing to do with Zen."

"You've made up the whole thing. But the awakeness in you is not dreaming. Only the mind is dreaming. It tells itself stories and wants to know if you're progressing. When you shift into wakefulness, you realize, "Wait, it's a dream. The mind is creating an altered state of reality, a virtual reality, but it's not true -- it's just thought." Thought can tell a million stories inside of awareness, and it's not going to change awareness one bit. The only thing that's going to change is the way the body feels. If you tell yourself a sad story, the body reacts to that. And if you tell yourself a self-aggrandizing story, the body feels puffed up, confident. But when you realize it's all stories, there can be a vast waking up out of the mind, out of the dream. You don't awaken, what has eternally been awake realizes itself. That which is eternally awake is what you are."

~Adyashanti

So let’s be clear, Adyashanti is not a follower of the Buddha Dharma as such. He is an independent “spiritual teacher,” which makes him appear to me to be half pratyekabuddha, half bodhisattva, and half rishi. (Yes, there’s a joke there.)

But since he is not in a Buddha lineage, his presentation, as I read it, is more like the nondual language of Advaita Vedanta. For example it looks like he gives “satsangs” which is a term of art for Hindu lineages. This distinction is in itself enough to explain why you could be surprised by the Buddhist Ford’s discussion. For instance, in Ford’s quoted section he uses the word “you” 5 times and 4 of those times he is directly quoting Guishan;s reply to Yangshan, while in a single paragraph Adyashanti uses the word “you” 12 times. I take this to be significant to the different approaches.

Ford is not saying that “awakening” is like a brain disease; he’s saying the “be hear now” of bliss ninnies is like a brain disease and is not genuine awakening.

christopher::: wrote:I'm confused by what Ford is saying. This is what mindfulness practice and meditation are all about, to be fully present.

To be fully present is not to be fully present. To not be fully present is to be fully present. What are the three stages or levels of being fully present? First, to be fully present is the beginner’s or elementary level. Second the intermediate level is to not dwell in being fully present. Third, the advanced or complete level is to have no conception of not dwelling in being fully present.

christopher::: wrote:To learn to detach from our false illusions, expectations, ideas of self/other. Its not " like a brain disease, Alzheimer’s or some similar disorder where we are robbed of our past, and exist only in a constantly shrinking present until finally we forget to breathe."

Again, I think Ford is being misunderstood. He is saying that the bliss ninny view of being in the present is not genuine being in the present. The key is whether the person is “in the present” as the host or the guest. Most people who talk about “be here now” or “be in the present” or “go with the flow” are taking the position of guest and are not standing in the position of host. Being a guest in the present, yet mistaking it as being a host, is what Ford is criticizing, in my view of his words.

_/|\_Gregory

Why you do not understand is because the three carts were provisional for former times, and because the One Vehicle is true for the present time. ~ Zen Master 6th Ancestor Huineng

I had the benefit of hearing this talk firsthand last Saturday at a zazenkai, and based on that talk and the discussion afterward, I can confirm that what Guo Gu and Gregory have written captures the gist of it:

Guo Gu wrote:i think ford is just warning ppl not to literally cut themselves from past and future and come to some misconception that awakening is just lit. staying in the present. if one does do that, then their "so-called" awakening would be like a disease.

Gregory Wonderwheel wrote:He is saying that the bliss ninny view of being in the present is not genuine being in the present. The key is whether the person is “in the present” as the host or the guest. Most people who talk about “be here now” or “be in the present” or “go with the flow” are taking the position of guest and are not standing in the position of host. Being a guest in the present, yet mistaking it as being a host, is what Ford is criticizing, in my view of his words.

I think that Ford's warning takes to task any notion of "awakening" that rejects our history, karma, vow, delusion, causes and conditions, repentance, commitment to pick up the kids after school and milk on the way home, all those human dharmas, in the name of "being in the present" or "being here now."

The whole of our past, our immediate history, our losses and gains, our loves, our failures, all of it is there, is here. And it stretches even farther back, to our parents dreams and hopes, failures and successes. And it continues on to the birth of the stars themselves. And it extends forward. Every action. Every thought. Every feeling, plays out in ways in which we can barely dream.

This very moment (as well as this very moment) is ever and always Buddha – how could anyone ever be “apart from” or “other than” this very moment, this very Buddha?

Remember, every real “this very moment” is an instance of existence-time, a specific manifest location-moment. Since every real moment is Buddha, there is nothing but this very moment, nothing but Buddha. The mountains and trees, the moon and stars are forms of Buddha, the call of the dove, the tires on the pavement are the preaching of Buddha, the taste of tea and the taste of cucumber are the flavors of this very moment, smells and feelings, emotions and thoughts here-now is Buddha, is the wheel of Dharma.

All actual dreams are dreamt here-now, thus are this very moment – even to say or think that a dream is not Buddha, is Buddha. As Dogen so eloquently presents:

Because this wheel of Dharma is the ten directions and eight aspects themselves, the great ocean, Sumeru, national lands, and all dharmas are realized here and now. This [realization] is the “preaching of the dream-state in the dream-state” that is prior to all dreams. The pervasive disclosure of the entire universe is the dream-state. This dream-state is just “the clear-clear hundred things”—and it is the very moment in which we doubt that it is so; it is the very moment of confusion. At this moment, it is to dream things, it is to be in things, it is to preach things, and so on. When we learn this in practice, roots and stalks, twigs and leaves, flowers and fruit, and light and color are all the great dreamstate, which is not to be confused with dreaminess. Yet people who prefer not to learn the Buddha’s truth, when they encounter this “preaching a dream in a dream,” idly suppose that it might mean creating insubstantial dreamy things which do not exist at all; they suppose it might be like adding to delusion in delusion. [But] it is not so. Even when we are adding to delusion in delusion, we should endeavor just then to learn in practice the path of clarity of expression on which the words “delusion upon delusion” are naturally spoken. “Preaching the dream-state in the dream-state” is the buddhas, and the buddhas are wind, rain, water, and fire.Shobogenzo, Muchu-setsumu, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

I still feel that Adyashanti's view makes good sense (even if he overused "you" and is not "technically" considered to be within the Zen school) and actually seems similar (perhaps?) to what Ted has just presented. Bob O'Hearn (heartbeat7) recently shared a perspective that I think addresses both the views of Ford & Adyashanti simultaneously, rather than conceptualizing them as being in opposition… Might we not see a larger unity?

"If it is really true, that our nature is ultimately pure and transcendentally illumined, that we are not inherently different from the Buddhas and the so-called enlightened ones, that the concepts of liberation and bondage are only imaginary fantasies of interpretation on perception, and that there is no nirvana to be obtained beyond what is present right here right now, then why is it that we seem to encounter so much suffering in the midst of our lives?

After pondering this conundrum for many years, I came to recognize that the challenges and obstacles which we encounter in life are actually our own creations. They simply represent the way we set it up for ourselves, prior to assuming these virtual reality forms that we now take to be who and what we are. In short, we needed the theatrics of life’s seeming dualities in order to remember the non-dual.

We had to forget who and what we truly are in order to enjoy the eventual recognition of our supreme nature, as in a game of “hide & seek”… while identified with the human character we take ourselves to be, we tend by habit and conditioning to cling to the belief that there is some sort of special state that is other than that which we are currently experiencing. We persist in this assumption because we look at our current condition and find it somehow lacking. Perhaps it would be a useful inquiry to examine exactly what is lacking about it.

Certainly, if we investigate the traditional literature about spiritual enlightenment, we encounter all sorts of claims about the raptures of bliss and ecstasy to be found in advanced meditative states, but what we rarely hear about is the fact that no state is permanent, even satori and Samadhi. Eventually, one must return to normal consciousness and deal with traffic, weather, the body’s quirks and foibles, and especially other people (most of whom stubbornly refuse to accept how advanced and wisdom-imbued we now have become, at least in our own minds).

Rather, if we are truly honest with ourselves, we might notice how we still habitually tend to crave pleasure and avoid pain, and in fact still have within us a whole menu of software programs based on confirming the solid and enduring existence of our favorite self-image, regardless of the effect that such activity might have on our fellow ignoramuses.

Indeed, the ego-mind loves special experiences, because it provides the perfect opportunity to feel special, to feel enlightened, and to feel real. The more such experiences the better. What it especially loves is the experience that it doesn’t even exist, because that comes with very high points on the scale of human spiritual accomplishment. Indeed, it is particularly proud of its new and exalted status as an advanced entity that is liberated from itself. That’s a real feather in its cap!

Conversely, what the spiritual ego-mind can never abide by is the suggestion that the most ordinary experiences of life — getting out of bed, brushing one’s teeth, going to work, coming home and having dinner, washing the dishes, playing with one’s children and watching TV, kissing one’s spouse and going to sleep — are all perfect manifestations of complete and unexcelled enlightenment. No, it thrives on the glamor of the extraordinary, just like an addict craves the next high. In that regard (and to dispel such illusions), the contemporary western Dzogchen teacher Jackson Peterson makes a good point when he notes:

“Everything that is happening is exactly It. Thoughts, images, sensations, emotions, feelings, stillness, movement, emptiness, awareness, actions and perceptions are 100% It. There is no other option because there is zero distance between experience and the knowing of it. That being so, how can you say your “practice” is not going well? That being so, how can you say you sometimes “lose” It? That being so, how can you say that you are sometimes distracted, when the object of your distraction is also it? Is the Absolute or Buddha Nature ever being something other than This? If not, why keep looking elsewhere?”

Of course, to the aspirant hooked on the spiritual merry-go-round of increasingly subtler realizations and deeper, more dramatic spiritual insights and so forth, the usual life is scorned as some sort of delusion which needs to be transcended and then discarded. This type of seeker tends to idolize the legendary characters in the spiritual literature, seeking to emulate their lives. Little do they realize that these personalities are typically the product of devoted hagiographers who attribute extraordinary feats to their heroes and heroines, often at the expense of the real truth about these exalted individuals. And what is that truth? Essentially, they were no more special than any of us. It’s just that they (might have) realized that, and we don’t.

We are all dream characters in the heart-mind of Source, and Source makes no distinction in terms of superior or inferior, so why should we? Each one of us is a unique vehicle for Source to explore its own nature, which is de facto also our own nature. We are, each of us in our own way, the universe in the process of becoming increasingly self-aware, and whether we climb the highest mountain or just look after our pets at home, makes no difference. It is all perfect fuel for self-awareness, and one dream adventure or virtual reality game is no better or more enlightened than the next.

As mentioned above, the only value in truly “awakening” is to let go of the stress of trying to make things be other than they are, trying to figure the magnificent mystery of life out, trying to make it conform to the way we imagine it should be, based on second-hand opinions and idealistic speculation. What is, is. Just letting that sink in, just letting that be the case, can be eminently relaxing. Letting go, surrendering the need to have it all end in some triumphant march through the streets of heaven, is not really so difficult, except to the one who takes their fictional self-image seriously."

I always like to make the movie analogy;when an actor knows that he's playing a part, there's no struggle.Only when the actors aren't aware that they're following a script, the error of identifying with their role happens, so they think of themselves to be something seperate (in essence) wanting to escape a dream is ofcourse part of the dream, those who know that they're dreaming or playing a part have no desire for enlightenment, to end suffering, to make anything other then it is, etc.Therefore religious practises only enhance the virus of self-identification when one tries to escape the role with acting out the role,it cannot be done. (similair to archetypes (persons, beings, gods, bodhisattvas etc)In other words, one cannot dream oneself out of a dream with the use of dreams, which again is similair to Huang Po's statement, that mind cannot be used to get something from mind.

"In the monastery of your heart and body, you have a temple where all buddhas unite." ~Milarepa

Dharmakaya as the Supreme Source by Jackson Peterson (Dzogchen teacher)

"Its possible in our practice we may become too focused on our micro-world, our personal and subjective inner grooming. We are checking up on our “state” and fine tuning endlessly. The macro-world is always left as a vague aspect of our subjective practice in the form of “my” perceptions and “my” sensory experiences. We don’t notice the tight cocoon our limited and focused attention weaves.

However, life events as well as ESP and synchronicity occurrences can unexpectedly open and widen our perspective from time to time. In Dzogchen and Mahayana Buddhism in general, the Dharmakaya is considered the ultimate Basis or Ground of Being from which all creative potentials arise. But too often this Primordial Basis is described or believed to be an amorphous space of energy potential instead of being the dimension of a Supreme Source or Universal Intelligence.

Dzogchen describes this Supreme Source as “Kun Je Gyalpo”: the All-Creating Monarch” also referred to as Samantabhadra: the “All Good One”. Buddhism posits a Buddha Nature that has omniscient wisdom (yeshe), supreme bliss (dewachen)and infinite compassion (thugje). However this quality of spiritual sentience always manifests as individual Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who realize this inner spiritual dynamic. We often miss the all pervasive aspect of the Buddha Nature that manifests as macro-reality (tsal) as well as all “personal” experience (rolpa). It’s all arising from this same Dharmakaya Source and all is empty in essence, clear cognizance, and appearing as energetic formations.

Since the space-like Dharmakaya has no specific location in space or time, it is equally everywhere, hence the term “all pervasive”. The “all-pervasiveness” is experienced as Clear Light (rigpa gyi o’dsal) Awareness and vast penetrating transparency (zangthal).

Every movement, every action, every intention, every thought, every form, every energy, every perception, every consciousness is this Buddha Nature in expression of its infinite potentials. (tsal, rolpa, and gyan)It is this Dharmakaya (chos sku) Wisdom Intelligence that we call the Absolute (cho nyid). It is its Buddha Nature infused expressions (tsal) that we call the “relative”. The Absolute is manifesting as the relative with no gap or distance between the two.

Its possible for our relative consciousness (shes pa) to experience itself to be the Absolute in the creative act of manifesting Itself as our personal consciousness (yid). In that moment the Absolute Intelligence and the relative consciousness are known to be “cause” and “effect” within the same moment and location. The Absolute is cause and the relative consciousness is the effect.

The wisdom of the Absolute illumines the relative consciousness (nampar shes pa) leaving it (shes pa) devoid of any sense of independent autonomy or existence. For a flash, only the Absolute remains. This is what all mystics call “gnosis”. In Buddhism this experience is when our “individual” and relative consciousness (shes pa) realizes its essence as Dharmakaya Buddha Nature.

To experience this is to know the Absolute in that flash of gnosis (rigpa). To know the Absolute is to be liberated from the cocoon of self-absorbed micro-consciousness (sam).

In Dzogchen this flash of the Absolute Dharmakaya Intelligence is called “rigpa”. The more often that rigpa occurs the more the relative consciousness or self-mind (sem) is transformed into its essential nature and each rigpa occurrence leaves the consciousness (shes pa) more infused and replete with the attributes of the Dharmakaya itself as omniscient wisdom, supreme bliss and infinite compassion. This is like brittle ice melting into pure spacious water.

As this transformative process develops one’s consciousness (shes pa) moves from being “head-centered” to being “heart-centered”. The heart is the space of the Dharmakaya in humans. Our relative consciousness dissolves in its Origin. In its place an always present Buddha is revealed."

Milarepa.jpg

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.